Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Rihgu wrote:

 Argive wrote:

Rihgu wrote:
This makes some of the points costs make more sense. Weapons and wargear that are going to be mass-updated in October across all codices were given points with that in mind (so as if the update was already rolled out).
Presumably the units themselves will get new points. How big of a problem this is will be based on what the point raises are.

I don't buy that.. Coz a bunch of stuff is really whack. I mean really whack... And they are pointed accordingly to a codex that might drop in a year or more by which point we are likely to get another CA points adjustment as well as the codex points when the eventual codex comes out?

It just seems like plain ol negligence/incompetence.

No, that's the opposite of what I said. I said that they (multi-meltas, power weapons, chainfists, thunder hammers, etc) are pointed according to a universal release that will come out in October alongside the Space Marine codex, which will give multi-meltas, power weapons, chainfists, thunder hammers, etc. new stats which will roll out to numerous codexes all at once. This is to prevent a scenario where they release points costs for all these weapons and then have to release a FAQ with new points costs for every faction affected.
All units are pointed according to their current stats and abilities. Even in bizarre cases like Kabalite Warriors.

In the world of a 2W tac marine for 18 pt the cost of all other infantry makes sense does it? Weapons like heavy bolter etc I can sort of understand. But nobody is getting extra wounds and its the bodies that went up as well as the guns.

 skchsan wrote:
Or... you can just shoot at 2W marines with appropriate weapons, and leave lasguns to kill T3 models?

I think the time of automatically deferring to marines vs guardsmen comparison is over with this buff.

Why not invest in proper MEQ killing weapons? For example, any one of the 2D weapons discussed.

What 2D weapons were they?

Starcannons are probably the best I have access to, and thats 70 points for 2 of them. And they might kill 1 tac marine. so over a 5 turn game, they may make their points back, assuming the marine opponent never attacks it in any way.

It also means the only way to defeat even a fluffy mixed up space marine army, will be to spam war walkers and falcons and nothing else. Which is already what eldar have to do, even before the buff to marines. And its boring.

Where's the howling banshees, who should be able to delete a marine squad per turn solo easily? Oh yeh, they struggle to kill guardsmen.

It reaffirms that my decision to give up on modern GW rules and to stick solely with 3rd Ed 40k gaming was the correct decision.

 Just Tony wrote:
It reaffirms that my decision to give up on modern GW rules and to stick solely with 3rd Ed 40k gaming was the correct decision.

Ok, using 3rd edition rules, my Baharroth charges your squad, gets 27 hits and 18 power weapon wounds against your squad : D

I'm fine with my SMs going to 2w.

I mean, to hear alot of you talk my classic armies were/are going to get squatted any day now.... So the time was already coming where I'd be playing them as 2w Primaris.
GWs just getting you used to the idea early for me.

I've been saying 2-wound Marines was going to be a thing for a while now.

I've got something of a friend who drops me little breadcrumbs here and there- and even they aren't privy to everything- for example, they don't know when new models are coming out, or what the final product will look like, but they do know that chances are the models you'll see over the next year or so are pretty much done and at the very least- they're in the 'segmenting' process where they decide how they'll be 'cut and sprued'.

But in truth, it was obviously coming.

GW made Primaris Marines their own special unique thing because if they just made 'New body sizes', the Grognards wouldn't throw money at them- they'd harrumph, say their old marines are just fine, and that's money left on the table and GW ain't havin' it.

Because I know as far back as 2012 GW was in the process of trying to figure out how to make Space Marines more 'properly scaled'. Even Chaos Marines in more recent releases got bigger.

A standard loyalist Space Marine kit hasn't been released since the Deathwatch Veterans kit, and they're noticeably bigger than the Marines before. Considering that was... 5 years ago, maybe 4? And nothing but Primaris Marines have come out since then, named Characters are going Rubicon...

...if anyone didn't see the 'All Space Marines will have 2 wounds and be pretty much Primaris Marines' coming? I don't know what to tell you other than... you should have. Games Workshop is more predictable than the sunrise.

Overall- it's an extra wound and that's all.

EVERYONE is getting weapon buffs. FFS, people act like multi-damage weapons, sheer volume of dice attacks, and AP aren't as common as the Space Marines themselves.

And we all knew that any major changes would happen first with the Space Marines, and then every Codex afterwards is going to be written to counter Space Marines- this isn't really new.

 Crusaderobr wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:
It reaffirms that my decision to give up on modern GW rules and to stick solely with 3rd Ed 40k gaming was the correct decision.

Ok, using 3rd edition rules, my Baharroth charges your squad, gets 27 hits and 18 power weapon wounds against your squad : D

you say that like its a bad thing. a phoenix lord should be able to crush a squad of marines effortlessly in melee. rip sustained assault and biting blades.

 warmaster21 wrote:

 Crusaderobr wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:
It reaffirms that my decision to give up on modern GW rules and to stick solely with 3rd Ed 40k gaming was the correct decision.

Ok, using 3rd edition rules, my Baharroth charges your squad, gets 27 hits and 18 power weapon wounds against your squad : D

you say that like its a bad thing. a phoenix lord should be able to crush a squad of marines effortlessly in melee. rip sustained assault and biting blades.

Oh I love 3rd Edition rules, just pointing out to Just Tony that the grass is not always greener on the other side haha!

Crusaderobr wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:
It reaffirms that my decision to give up on modern GW rules and to stick solely with 3rd Ed 40k gaming was the correct decision.

Ok, using 3rd edition rules, my Baharroth charges your squad, gets 27 hits and 18 power weapon wounds against your squad : D

Oh, gee! Look at a hyperbolic example that would only happen with damn near perfect rolling! You sure showed me!!!!!



Go learn the definition of the following terms: outlier, potential output, statistical output, actual output, and then get back to me if you are really interested in having this conversation.

It was about time the properly divided heavy infantry from light infantry.

I will make my decision on whether I like it or not based on whether they put the same effort into the new ork codex as they have for marines.

warmaster21 wrote:

 Crusaderobr wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:
It reaffirms that my decision to give up on modern GW rules and to stick solely with 3rd Ed 40k gaming was the correct decision.

Ok, using 3rd edition rules, my Baharroth charges your squad, gets 27 hits and 18 power weapon wounds against your squad : D

you say that like its a bad thing. a phoenix lord should be able to crush a squad of marines effortlessly in melee. rip sustained assault and biting blades.

How often did it actually happen, though?

Crusaderobr wrote:

 warmaster21 wrote:

 Crusaderobr wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:
It reaffirms that my decision to give up on modern GW rules and to stick solely with 3rd Ed 40k gaming was the correct decision.

Ok, using 3rd edition rules, my Baharroth charges your squad, gets 27 hits and 18 power weapon wounds against your squad : D

you say that like its a bad thing. a phoenix lord should be able to crush a squad of marines effortlessly in melee. rip sustained assault and biting blades.

Oh I love 3rd Edition rules, just pointing out to Just Tony that the grass is not always greener on the other side haha!

In this case it most assuredly is, and my post above remains unchanged by this post here.

 Just Tony wrote:

warmaster21 wrote:

 Crusaderobr wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:
It reaffirms that my decision to give up on modern GW rules and to stick solely with 3rd Ed 40k gaming was the correct decision.

Ok, using 3rd edition rules, my Baharroth charges your squad, gets 27 hits and 18 power weapon wounds against your squad : D

you say that like its a bad thing. a phoenix lord should be able to crush a squad of marines effortlessly in melee. rip sustained assault and biting blades.

How often did it actually happen, though?

Crusaderobr wrote:

 warmaster21 wrote:

 Crusaderobr wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:
It reaffirms that my decision to give up on modern GW rules and to stick solely with 3rd Ed 40k gaming was the correct decision.

Ok, using 3rd edition rules, my Baharroth charges your squad, gets 27 hits and 18 power weapon wounds against your squad : D

you say that like its a bad thing. a phoenix lord should be able to crush a squad of marines effortlessly in melee. rip sustained assault and biting blades.

Oh I love 3rd Edition rules, just pointing out to Just Tony that the grass is not always greener on the other side haha!

In this case it most assuredly is, and my post above remains unchanged by this post here.

Man this guy is so uptight. Um dude, I would at least get 18+ hits reliably every time. Go ahead, bring math into the equation. I dont care. I charged a 9 man Crisis unit with shield drones back in the day and they got wiped out in a single turn. You want to face 3rd edition Eldar? I will give it to you. But we all know your too scared to face the cheese. Eldar 3rd was cheese. Get out of here with your doom and gloom of 9th edition. If you think 3rd edition is more balanced than 9th, you dont know 40k.

 Jidmah wrote:
It was about time the properly divided heavy infantry from light infantry.

I will make my decision on whether I like it or not based on whether they put the same effort into the new ork codex as they have for marines.

Imo the issue is not the inflation, allbeit i am a bit sceptical what a smaller board and 30" bolters can do,.... but rather that gw will insist to stretching it out artificially .

Which will be an issue,.

ppfftt

yukishiro1 wrote:
Ok, so you actually do think that marines being only 3x as tough as a normal human to small arms fire wasn't superior enough, and that their superiority needed to be further increased.

Glad we cleared that one up, though it woulda been a lot faster if we could have avoided 5 posts worth of back and forth about alleged rants.

You focus too much on "2x" or "3x", which are a bit to abstract and don't really say all that much.
Let's put it this way instead:

51 points of guardsmen (bolter on sgt.) shooting at Tacticals with FRFSRF:
- 36 Lasguns, 18 hits, 6 wounds, 2 dead tacticals.
- 2 Bolters, 1 hit, 0,5 wound, 0,17 additional dead tacticals for a total of 2,17 dead tacticals, or ~32 pts of dead marines.

Now 48 points of Tacticals (stormbolter on sgt.) shooting at guardsmen with rerolling 1's to hit:
- 8 Bolters, 5,77 hits, 3,85 wounds, 2,57 wounds - a total of ~2,5 dead guardsmen, or ~12,5 pts of dead guardsmen.

*Lets go back to Guardsmen (bolter on sgt.), but this time without FRFSRF:
- 18 Lasguns, 9 hits, 3 wounds, 1 dead tactical.
- 2 Bolters, 1 hit, 0,5 wound, 0,17 additional dead tacticals for a total of 1,17 dead tacticals, or ~17,5 pts of dead marines.


Well look at that, Guardsmen are point-for-point much better at killing 1W-Tactical Marines than what Tactical Marines are at killing Guardsmen, even without FRFSRF.
I don't know about you, but in my opinion that just feels wrong.

Let's do one more comparison: 10 Tacticals (150 pts) vs. 30 Guardsmen (150 pts). Without buffs and special weapons (which would ironically favor the Guardsmen more in this situation, because 3 Plasmaguns would on their own do 1,67 wounds, 2,08 if overcharging.)

- 10 Tacticals: 20 shots, 13,33 hits, 8,88 wounds, 5,92 wounds after saves, let's round it up to 6 dead guardsmen for 30 pts worth of dead guardsmen.

- 30 Guardsmen: 57 shots, 28,5 hits, 9,5 wounds, 3,17 wounds after saves. That's ~47,5 points worth of dead Tacticals.

So ... Yes, I do think that Firstborn Marines needed to get tougher against smallarms-fire such as Lasguns.
The math even shows that Infantry Squads outperform Tacticals point-for-point in a firefight, and not by little either, but by as much as <50%.

Now you're free to disagree and you probably do, but at the end of the day your only reason for doing so is "I don't like Marines getting tougher", because frankly, if Infantry with Lasguns outshoot Tacticals with Bolters, then the Tacticals aren't though enough.

You were already playing against nothing but Intercessor armies anyway.

How is 2W Tacticals a gigantic change at all? It's not like they're staying at the same points.

No seriously though, all this stuff about how your Guardsmen or Guardians will struggle to kill them now, when it's just the exact same issue as versus Primaris units.... which is all you ever play against anyway?

So again. What actually changes here?

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:
It's a little weird. I had kind of accepted that Primaris were going to phase out classic marines, but apparently they were just a beta test?

The nice thing is people who want to mod Intercessors into First Born get the best of both worlds. Its a pretty great move.

What if in an edition or two squads of intercessors are going to be able to have one or two members carry las talons, onslaught cannons and hellblaster plasma weapons? GW could phase out classic marines out, and if someone wants to use them, they would have to rebase them and play their tacs and devs as primaris.

I think the change will be good in the long run. The problem is that if they dont make massive FAQ, for over a year some armies will just be in terrible spot. With the insane rate of releases even after that we will not have stable game for more than 6 mounts. The guys that want to make 40k professional will be screwed, since you cant have comparative game in such environment. 40k is not video game and such fast changes are not something positive.

 Bosskelot wrote:
You were already playing against nothing but Intercessor armies anyway.

How is 2W Tacticals a gigantic change at all? It's not like they're staying at the same points.

No seriously though, all this stuff about how your Guardsmen or Guardians will struggle to kill them now, when it's just the exact same issue as versus Primaris units.... which is all you ever play against anyway?

So again. What actually changes here?

Well chaos will now probably also field 2 W dudes, so technically the other big superfaction is in it. (well as soon as the dex drops but you get what i mean)

+1W nurgle termintors and 2W PMs sound very nice too.

Caped at 5 units like havocks also got much better now, with extra T and 2W each they are actualy resilient to weak armies shoting.

Aye plague marines will look nice, but on paper, i'd say for regular CSM and if the stratagems remain in place i doubt that you see many in the lists unless of course you play DG.

 Bosskelot wrote:
You were already playing against nothing but Intercessor armies anyway.

How is 2W Tacticals a gigantic change at all? It's not like they're staying at the same points.

No seriously though, all this stuff about how your Guardsmen or Guardians will struggle to kill them now, when it's just the exact same issue as versus Primaris units.... which is all you ever play against anyway?

So again. What actually changes here?

nothing but it's Marines so they have to complain.

Unlike marine and eldar players, I'm used to playing with a codex that was written two editions ago


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Bosskelot wrote:
You were already playing against nothing but Intercessor armies anyway.

How is 2W Tacticals a gigantic change at all? It's not like they're staying at the same points.

No seriously though, all this stuff about how your Guardsmen or Guardians will struggle to kill them now, when it's just the exact same issue as versus Primaris units.... which is all you ever play against anyway?

So again. What actually changes here?

This. Tacticals with two wounds are just intercessors with worse bolters and a heavy/special weapon instead of the grenade launcher.

My opinion on this depends solely on whether Nids are rescaled to match.

With the Primaris and now new old marine stats, a Tyranid Warrior would need something like 5 base attacks, T5, and 5W just to return to the relative place it used to be, and that's before further stat buffs to its weapons.

It used to be a significantly superior organism to standard marines, 3 times as many attacks and wounds, and it was still considered mediocre on the table.

The odds of that kind of rescale happening? Probably zero.

I will probably count myself lucky if one of the warrior weapons gets more than 1D.

Personally I had the move taken. It not because of rules or balance, but because they are ugly models with no plans to be redesigned. Compared to Primaris, they may as well just call them “squat marines” because proportionally they look like they have been squashed down by a heavy gravity in comparison. Improve the rules, encourage their use and you fill the board with all kinds of ugly.

Part of the reason I believe GW haven’t updated the Eldar aspect warriors properly is because they couldn’t bare the shame of such ugly sculpts on the table representing their brand. As such I am surprised they have made this choice rather than continuing to encourage the march towards primaris.

 Bosskelot wrote:
How is 2W Tacticals a gigantic change at all? It's not like they're staying at the same points.

Because, in much the same way GW designs their rules, everyone seems to be viewing this change in a vacuum. Doesn't make much sense to me...

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:
How is 2W Tacticals a gigantic change at all? It's not like they're staying at the same points.

Because, in much the same way GW designs their rules, everyone seems to be viewing this change in a vacuum. Doesn't make much sense to me...

A second wound makes quite a big difference to the game when you look at how 9th is playing out. High durability ob sec models are game winners, and 18 points really is not that many points when you consider the other space marine stats. All of which equate to a unit that will be hard to shift from an objective. Now admittedly, as time goes by, other armies will see the same buff which will potentially dwarf the initial space marine advantage (notably Custodes and Death Guard in my opinion) However as we are also seeing weapon changes, we may instead find that those advantages become completely negated - especially as 9th did not adapt the AOS approach of wounds carrying over (for the best).

What is becoming apparent to me however is that 9th edition is very much going to be the edition where MEQ shooty infantry will be king. Beyond the objective game, the buffs to weapons such as Heavy Bolters and Multi Meltas will see a hard counter to light and heavy vehicles whilst the hit roll modifier cap will Counter those armies that relied on this to compensate for poor defences. The flamer changes along with blast rules will counter the horde armies leaving the MEQs are the true game winners.

For me I see a shift going back to 7th edition way of playing and in particular, factoring in the new wounds and weapon rules - Drop Pods will see a quick return to the board.

Because as we all know, only Marine armies have flamers, blast weapons, and guns to fight light/heavy vehicles.

ERJAK wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Mixzremixzd wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Insectum, you're hitting on a point I've been trying to make for a while.

40k is now a (war)game in which plastic models stand on a table, their owners roll dice.

It is no longer a war(game), in which assembled armies of hostile foes engage each-other in a pitched battle (abstracted by models and dice).

You're gonna have to fill me in as I started playing earnestly in 6th (or 7th?), when was 40k ever portrayed that way and how?

It's been an uphill and downhill struggle between editions but Epic was pretty good and 4th edition was pretty good. HH is also pretty good, and though it uses the 7th edition architecture, it does a bit better in the 'modeling strategic maneuver/communications/etc.' department. It's more "realistic" in general.

Yeah, so realistic how future military vehicles explode when they touch bushes or fences, or slight inclines.

And, I don't know how to tell you this, but EVERY wargame is a game where plastic models stand on a table and their owners roll dice.

I could talk about how you and your opponent defined terrain badly if bushes or fences or slight inclines are dangerous for tanks (they aren't in my playgroup) or about how terrain and mobility/counter-mobility are battle-altering feature. I could talk about how bogging down historically caused crews to abandon their tank, especially if it was already badly damaged by enemy fire (as it must be in HH for this scenario to occur). I could also point out that nothing 'explodes' when they do so.

But somehow I feel like you are determined to rage about something perfectly sensible, so have at it.

And if you can't see the difference between "a wargame is armies attacking each other (abstracted by models and dice)" and "a wargame is models and dice with no link to anything" then I fear you will always miss my point.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, ladies and gentlemen, we have reached that point in 40k history where it is now easier to kill a Rhino with small arms than the 10 man tac squad it is carrying.

It takes 90 boltgun hits to kill a Rhino, and 120 boltgun hits to kill a 10-man tactical squad.

An armored personnel carrier is more vulnerable to small arms fire than the infantry squad it is carrying.

Lol.

And the typical flaw of such threads start to appear...

Your argument is based on Rhinos staying as they are.

Probably a good guess they won't be.